Trading Shots: Downes and Fowlkes on throwing the damn towel

In this week’s Trading Shots, MMAjunkie columnist Ben Fowlkes and retired UFC/WEC fighter Danny Downes discuss the merits of throwing in the towel – or not.

* * * *

Fowlkes: So Danny, earlier this week there was a column on the sports website Deadspin under the headline, “If MMA Doesn’t Change, Someone Is Going To Die.” It was, as you can probably guess from that title, pretty critical of the sport, citing a “fundamental defect for which doctors and referees, coaches and corners, promoters and announcers, and journalists and bloggers and fans are all responsible.” Basically, it’s the Throw the Damn Towel argument again, this time prompted by the fight between WSOF bantamweights Marlon Moraes and Josh Rettinghouse.

“The moment a fighter is in serious danger, the fight should stop,” Josh Tucker writes. “The moment the damage a fighter is sustaining loses any purpose other than satisfying the worst impulses of the worst element of the crowd, someone has to tell him he’s done.”

Since you’re a guy who actually knows what it’s like inside the cage, I’m curious about your take on this piece. What do you make of it? Should we throw the damn towel more in MMA?

Downes: I’m sure we can find many examples of fighters quitting in a fight, but the majority will keep going all the way until the grisly end. This attitude certainly sets up situations in which corners should throw in the towel for a fighter’s own good. All this sounds great in theory. We’re protecting fighters and looking out for their longterm health. But how does it work in practice? “The moment a fighter is in serious danger, the fight should stop.” What does that mean?

I agree that the “going out on your shield” mindset is ridiculous, but I’m a relative newcomer to that philosophy. When the ancient Greek army landed somewhere, they would order the troops to burn the boats. That way, they had no choice but to march on and continue their invasion to the end. You can call it silly, misplaced pride, but it does serve a purpose. You need to know that you’ll push through any type of adversity. You’ll keep going forward no matter what and not quit. If your mental mindset is to fall back the moment you find yourself in “serious danger,” you’re never going to achieve anything in MMA. How do you rationalize something as irrational as mixed martial arts?

Fowlkes: Maybe we don’t need the fighters to rationalize it. Maybe it’s fine for them to invoke all the war imagery they need (though even the ancient Greek armies had some dudes who just wanted to go home and write plays) just to get through the experience. I mean, I get that. You’re not going to be much of a fighter if you go in there thinking, “I hope I win, but if it looks like that’s not going to happen, then I’ll just quit before I get hurt.”

Of course, just because the fighter thinks that way doesn’t mean that everyone else has to. It’s perfectly fine if the fighter tells himself that he’s willing to die, just as long as we have refs and coaches and doctors there to tell him, “Yeah, but we’re not going to let you.” I see no problem with a system that works that way. Fighters tell themselves that they’re warriors, and the impartial officials step in when necessary to remind them that they’re athletes.

Where it seems like this argument may be oversimplifying the issue is, as you pointed out, the reference to this specific moment of “serious danger.” Like you, I’m not sure what it means, though I also feel a little like U.S. Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart: I know it when I see it. Or at least, I think I do, though my sense of serious danger might be different than yours, which might be different than Herb Dean’s, which might be different than Junior dos Santos’.

What I wonder is, as well-intentioned as this recurring argument may be, is it also a little hypocritical? This is a violent sport. We obviously like that about it. We also seem to feel bad about liking that, especially as we learn more about the potential consequences of it. When those of us in the media start wringing our hands about the physical risks (and I know I’ve done it), do you think it’s at least partly an attempt to clear our own consciences?

Downes: As the great Micheal Lee Aday once opined, “You Took the Words Right Out of My Mouth.” Fighters, fans and media can wax philosophic about all the reasons they enjoy MMA, but it’s a bloodsport at the end of the day. I don’t mean that as a pejorative; it’s a statement of fact. There may be regulations and commissions, but it’s still a combat sport predicated on causing harm to your opponent. Why do we decry “boring” fighters like Ben Askren? Why will Metamoris never become a global phenomenon no matter how many Gracies or BJJ black belts they can muster? Because it doesn’t satisfy our bloodlust. Guys are throwing setup punches for a 30-second period? Time to start booing.

The point of this isn’t to come off as pretentious. If that were the case, I would abandon my attempts to eschew obfuscation and adopt a more magniloquent writing style. The point is that we like the violence. At the same time though, the violence makes us uncomfortable. As a result, we write about safety and say, “Something has to be done!” As the sport continues I’m sure we’ll see many sad stories like we’re currently witnessing with NFL players. Like every other tragic story, we’ll just sigh, say, “That’s a shame,” and go about our business.

I suppose it’s important to keep shining the light on the risks of the sport, but what are we really accomplishing other than patting ourselves on the back? It’s like the guy who reads a Michael Pollen book for the first time. He’ll lecture you about GMOs, Monsanto and industrial agriculture, but does he ever change his eating habits? You know he’s hitting up Taco Bell for their new breakfast menu this week. Is the safety argument just about being on a high horse? And if it’s not, then what’s the ultimate goal? The NFL can make rule changes, but that won’t be so easy in MMA.

Fowlkes: I suppose the goal would be changing the culture of the sport so that we don’t glorify fighters who grit their teeth and walk through right hands just to get the crowd cheering and the bonus money flowing. There’s also the goal of creating an environment where refs and doctors and coaches feel more comfortable stopping a one-sided fight. Part of the problem with arguing in favor of that, especially for some of us geeky writer types (and I definitely include myself here), is that we might not always understand this problem as well as we think we do.

I’m reminded of what Greg Jackson said a few months back on the subject of throwing in the towel: “You can fall into a trap … where you’re writing about things beyond the scope of your experience. It’s a more complicated situation than just, this guy’s taking a beating and it needs to stop. I would say that the people on the outside saying we should stop this, they don’t know what it’s like to have that relationship with a fighter. There are a lot of factors that seem very simple to the people who don’t have to deal with the aftermath of that position.”

I think there’s something to that. We turn on the TV because we’ve been promised that two trained fighters will attempt to incapacitate each other at an appointed time. But once one of them looks like he’s probably not going to win, and is instead just going to continue to get beat up until time expires, we get indignant that no one is stopping it. To us, it seems simple. That guy’s chances of winning aren’t good enough to justify his continued participation. To the person who will have to sit down with him in the locker room afterward and explain, “Here’s the point where I stopped believing in you,” it might look very different.

I still think the impulse is a good one (and I still think Rettinghouse’s corner could’ve stopped that one). What we have here is an unsafe sport, so let’s not make it any worse than it has to be. At the same time, we’re kidding ourselves if we think that these are easy distinctions to make (Dan Henderson on his back, getting pummeled by “Shogun” Rua, is that serious danger or merely acceptable danger?), or that making them more aggressively will be the key to ensuring that no one ever again suffers serious injury or death in an MMA fight.

Downes: We all have double standards. It’s why we’re great drivers, but it’s just everyone else who sucks. It’s also why people who get upset with you just can’t take a joke while you always have a perfectly good reason for your anger. I think if you polled a lot of fighters, throwing in the towel would fall in a similar category.

From the outside you may think you’re saving someone. You’re preventing them from suffering more punishment, but you’re also taking away much more than that. It may sound strange, but fighting is extremely intimate. The reasons fighters can’t take a joke when you critique them is because a fight is very personal. My coach Duke Roufus always said you can learn a lot about yourself in a fight, and he’s right. It’s about more than just takedown defense or your ability to put together combos. It reveals your character. It gives you an opportunity to “see what you’re made of.” I know that statement usually smacks of antiquated masculinity and bulls–t machismo, but not in this case.

Will you let your own fear paralyze you, or will you fight through it? Every second of a fight you’re making that decision. Most of the time it’s not even a conscious decision. Just how muscle memory helps you counter a jab, it helps you counter your anxiety and doubt. We all know the famous scene in “Raging Bull” in which Jake Lamotta, after getting beat half to death, walks up to “Sugar” Ray Robinson and tells him, “You never got me down Ray.” It was the kind of thing I always wanted to be able to say after a fight [insert takedown defense joke].

Refusing to quit in a fight isn’t always about showing how great your chin is or being a tough guy. It’s about refusing to admit defeat. It’s physical manifestation of the will to push through. Despite logic, despite all semblance of reason, will you keep going or will you let them get you down?

MMA is a dangerous sport. No matter the motivations, I applaud any efforts to make the sport safer for fighters. Throwing in the towel, while commendable, probably isn’t going to work. Does that always make sense? No, but neither does MMA. And that’s just the way we like it.

Ben Fowlkes is MMAjunkie and USA TODAY’s MMA columnist. Danny Downes, a retired UFC and WEC fighter, is an MMAjunkie contributor who also writes for UFC.com and UFC 360. Follow them on twitter at @benfowlkesMMA and @dannyboydownes.

Matt Brown performed an honest career calculation that led him to his decision to retire after his next fight. His opponent, Diego Sanchez, seems to have chosen the opposite path. For many aging fighters, these are the two choices, and neither is an easy one to make.